[Hieronymus]

I'm really excited about this Mexico-England game. The Azteca will be rocking.

Haaland is so good. Love to see big number 9 who can smash from distance like his second goal.

Not sure what I expect from Mexico. They haven’t really been tested yet and this team seems more physical but with less flair than the typical Mexico team. Also, I am not sure how much Ecuador was terrible and how much Mexico was great last game. I am very confident, though, that the game won’t be dull today.

And yes Haaland makes a decent team scary all by himself.

Brazil sitting back to counter almost all game was a choice today.

[Hieronymus]

I'm really excited about this Mexico-England game. The Azteca will be rocking.

Haaland is so good. Love to see big number 9 who can smash from distance like his second goal.

Not sure what I expect from Mexico. They haven’t really been tested yet and this team seems more physical but with less flair than the typical Mexico team. Also, I am not sure how much Ecuador was terrible and how much Mexico was great last game. I am very confident, though, that the game won’t be dull today.

And yes Haaland makes a decent team scary all by himself.

Brazil sitting back to counter almost all game was a choice today.

[BostonCard]

Mexico down 2 goals twice, now a 1 goal game with a man advantage (plus the altitude setting in).  You’d prefer to be England right now, but Mexico has a shot.

BC

---

I'm really excited about this Mexico-England game. The Azteca will be rocking.

Haaland is so good. Love to see big number 9 who can smash from distance like his second goal.

Not sure what I expect from Mexico. They haven’t really been tested yet and this team seems more physical but with less flair than the typical Mexico team. Also, I am not sure how much Ecuador was terrible and how much Mexico was great last game. I am very confident, though, that the game won’t be dull today.

And yes Haaland makes a decent team scary all by himself.

Brazil sitting back to counter almost all game was a choice today.

The blast from Haaland from outside the box was the exception that proves the rule; he is mostly a finisher from well inside.



Brazil’s strategy of letting Norway pass around the back of the offensive half was not bad; despite the fact that Norway controlled the ball, Brazil actually had more chances in the first half, and was some great goalkeeping away from being up 1-0 or 2-0 before Haaland went off.

BC

[BostonCard]

Mexico down 2 goals twice, now a 1 goal game with a man advantage (plus the altitude setting in).  You’d prefer to be England right now, but Mexico has a shot.

BC

---

I'm really excited about this Mexico-England game. The Azteca will be rocking.

Haaland is so good. Love to see big number 9 who can smash from distance like his second goal.

Not sure what I expect from Mexico. They haven’t really been tested yet and this team seems more physical but with less flair than the typical Mexico team. Also, I am not sure how much Ecuador was terrible and how much Mexico was great last game. I am very confident, though, that the game won’t be dull today.

And yes Haaland makes a decent team scary all by himself.

Brazil sitting back to counter almost all game was a choice today.

The blast from Haaland from outside the box was the exception that proves the rule; he is mostly a finisher from well inside.



Brazil’s strategy of letting Norway pass around the back of the offensive half was not bad; despite the fact that Norway controlled the ball, Brazil actually had more chances in the first half, and was some great goalkeeping away from being up 1-0 or 2-0 before Haaland went off.

BC

[BostonCard]

Sad face.  Sorry for the fans of el Tri.

BC

[BostonCard]

Sad face.  Sorry for the fans of el Tri.

BC

[Canalejas]

Oh, to have such a golden opportunity not go our way. Couldn't get that equalizer even playing a man up at home.  

By the end it felt to me like that crushing loss against Michigan State in the Rose Bowl. Just couldn't get through their line.

[Canalejas]

Oh, to have such a golden opportunity not go our way. Couldn't get that equalizer even playing a man up at home.  

By the end it felt to me like that crushing loss against Michigan State in the Rose Bowl. Just couldn't get through their line.

[fullmetal]

England were fast and tall/long.  They disrupted the Mexican offense and won a lot of headers.  The altitude didn't seem to be a factor.  And Jude Bellingham is so dangerous.  Mexico played hard, but England turtled up effectively throughout the whole game, it seemed.  Mexico had the superior jerseys for sure.

[fullmetal]

England were fast and tall/long.  They disrupted the Mexican offense and won a lot of headers.  The altitude didn't seem to be a factor.  And Jude Bellingham is so dangerous.  Mexico played hard, but England turtled up effectively throughout the whole game, it seemed.  Mexico had the superior jerseys for sure.

[BostonCard]

Best jerseys of the day were the Norwegians.  Not usually a fan of the flag as a jersey, but the oversized cross worked.

BC

[BostonCard]

Best jerseys of the day were the Norwegians.  Not usually a fan of the flag as a jersey, but the oversized cross worked.

BC

[PVTree]

I thought it was a deserving England win. Mexico controlled the ball, but England was more effective in executing their game plan. 

A few deep balls were won by their forwards, and led to some confusion in the Mexican defensive side which resulted in their goals. Their second goal, a minute after the first, was especially devastating. 

Gordon ran past some fast Mexican defenders to create opportunities. Bellingham was at the right place at the right time to score a couple of goals. Their goalie, which I thought was a weakness, made a couple of incredible saves on headers going into the goal.

Being a man up, I thought Mexico had a great chance to tie the game, but Mexico played into their strength of trying to score on crosses into the box. It was a futile effort.

It was a golden opportunity to get into the quarters and face the beast that is Haaland. Besides France, I thought that any team could be beaten (by Mexico) in this world cup with what they have shown so far.

It's been a tough round for the American teams, going 0 for 4 so far (Paraguay, Canada, Brazil, and Mexico losing). 3 are still left (USA, Colombia, and Argentina). 

Until Germany won in Brazil, World Cups in the Americas had been won by American teams. I'm still hoping that's the case, but France is the overwhelming favorite from what I have seen.

[PVTree]

I thought it was a deserving England win. Mexico controlled the ball, but England was more effective in executing their game plan. 

A few deep balls were won by their forwards, and led to some confusion in the Mexican defensive side which resulted in their goals. Their second goal, a minute after the first, was especially devastating. 

Gordon ran past some fast Mexican defenders to create opportunities. Bellingham was at the right place at the right time to score a couple of goals. Their goalie, which I thought was a weakness, made a couple of incredible saves on headers going into the goal.

Being a man up, I thought Mexico had a great chance to tie the game, but Mexico played into their strength of trying to score on crosses into the box. It was a futile effort.

It was a golden opportunity to get into the quarters and face the beast that is Haaland. Besides France, I thought that any team could be beaten (by Mexico) in this world cup with what they have shown so far.

It's been a tough round for the American teams, going 0 for 4 so far (Paraguay, Canada, Brazil, and Mexico losing). 3 are still left (USA, Colombia, and Argentina). 

Until Germany won in Brazil, World Cups in the Americas had been won by American teams. I'm still hoping that's the case, but France is the overwhelming favorite from what I have seen.

[BostonCard]

I think yesterday showed the importance of having finishers: Haaland for the Norwegians and Belligham for the English yesterday (plus Kane).  Argentina has Messi, France has Mbappé and Dembele.  The losing teams yesterday, BRazil and Mexico created opportunities, but the last touch and having a guy at the right place at the right time just wasn’t there.  And yeah, I don’t know what the height differential was between Mexico and England (probably an average of 2-3 inches; AI [which may be hallucinating] says the English are, on average 6’0.5” while the Mexicans are 5’10” on average), but it was a visible difference, and I don’t know that I would have relied on a strategy of crosses for the equalizer(s).  It only takes one, but still.

BC

[BostonCard]

I think yesterday showed the importance of having finishers: Haaland for the Norwegians and Belligham for the English yesterday (plus Kane).  Argentina has Messi, France has Mbappé and Dembele.  The losing teams yesterday, BRazil and Mexico created opportunities, but the last touch and having a guy at the right place at the right time just wasn’t there.  And yeah, I don’t know what the height differential was between Mexico and England (probably an average of 2-3 inches; AI [which may be hallucinating] says the English are, on average 6’0.5” while the Mexicans are 5’10” on average), but it was a visible difference, and I don’t know that I would have relied on a strategy of crosses for the equalizer(s).  It only takes one, but still.

BC

[M T]

I didn't understand one play; can someone explain what happened?  In the Mexico-England game, fairly early, England had the ball.  A Mexican player came up behind and challenged the English player who had the ball, but not so that I'd expect a whistle.  As far as I remember, the Mexican player hadn't touched the ball.  Then the Mexican player (as I remember), pushed the English player away, and then reached down and picked the ball up with two hands.

If there had been no whistle, this would have been a silly hand ball. So, there must have been a whistle.  I would have thought if there were a whistle, the grabbing of the ball like that would be an overt, inexcusable delaying tactic that surely must be worth a yellow card.  (for delaying the other team's ability to put the ball in play).


Although England obviously is very talented, the chances that Mexico had in the last 10+12 minutes seemed innumerable.  England was down a player (and in at least on attempt, down 2). It seemed that one attempt would get in, but none did.  Isn't this the very aspect of soccer that people on this board have complained about: that turtling is very effective, allowing a less capable team to win on a 1-goal advantage?
(How accurately assessed is the amount of extra time?  11 minutes seemed quite high to me.  If high, it was an advantage given to Mexico.)

I think England played a very smart game by avoiding running as much, so minimizing the altitude effects.  (I may have said it before, but I once tried to compete in Mexico City in my late teens, and I died horribly.)

I would love it if the US coach sat Balogun for the whole game.  (Of course, that could only happen if the US won, so there's that too.)   But sitting him would show honoring the game and its rules and negating the apparent political pressure and the concession to that pressure.

[M T]

I didn't understand one play; can someone explain what happened?  In the Mexico-England game, fairly early, England had the ball.  A Mexican player came up behind and challenged the English player who had the ball, but not so that I'd expect a whistle.  As far as I remember, the Mexican player hadn't touched the ball.  Then the Mexican player (as I remember), pushed the English player away, and then reached down and picked the ball up with two hands.

If there had been no whistle, this would have been a silly hand ball. So, there must have been a whistle.  I would have thought if there were a whistle, the grabbing of the ball like that would be an overt, inexcusable delaying tactic that surely must be worth a yellow card.  (for delaying the other team's ability to put the ball in play).


Although England obviously is very talented, the chances that Mexico had in the last 10+12 minutes seemed innumerable.  England was down a player (and in at least on attempt, down 2). It seemed that one attempt would get in, but none did.  Isn't this the very aspect of soccer that people on this board have complained about: that turtling is very effective, allowing a less capable team to win on a 1-goal advantage?
(How accurately assessed is the amount of extra time?  11 minutes seemed quite high to me.  If high, it was an advantage given to Mexico.)

I think England played a very smart game by avoiding running as much, so minimizing the altitude effects.  (I may have said it before, but I once tried to compete in Mexico City in my late teens, and I died horribly.)

I would love it if the US coach sat Balogun for the whole game.  (Of course, that could only happen if the US won, so there's that too.)   But sitting him would show honoring the game and its rules and negating the apparent political pressure and the concession to that pressure.

[pefloresjr]

Every World Cup that I remember, the same thing happens to Mexico.  They have good to really good teams but are smaller than other teams and often lack great finishers.  This year, they did have some players who were good finishers but the size differential was critical when England went one down and parked the bus in front of the goal.  They couldn't get around the bigger players on corner kicks and couldn't get over them in the air on entry passes.  They also seemed to have trouble beating any of the England players off the dribble.  This caused Mexico to have to play a little conservative by sending balls in and hoping they would get a man on the ball or get a good rebound.  England's goalie also played a really great game.  Without great goaltending by England, I think Mexico wins or at least gets to penalty kicks.  The size difference makes more of a difference the farther you go in the tournament because the refs tend to call fewer and fewer fouls as the tournament progresses.  VAR is changing that a little but not for the run of the mill challenge where a bigger player just muscles in for better position.  Such a shame because, for me, the Mexican team was a great story and the most fun combo of fans/hosts/team in the World Cup this year.  Oh well, Canta, no llores!

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

Every World Cup that I remember, the same thing happens to Mexico.  They have good to really good teams but are smaller than other teams and often lack great finishers.  This year, they did have some players who were good finishers but the size differential was critical when England went one down and parked the bus in front of the goal.  They couldn't get around the bigger players on corner kicks and couldn't get over them in the air on entry passes.  They also seemed to have trouble beating any of the England players off the dribble.  This caused Mexico to have to play a little conservative by sending balls in and hoping they would get a man on the ball or get a good rebound.  England's goalie also played a really great game.  Without great goaltending by England, I think Mexico wins or at least gets to penalty kicks.  The size difference makes more of a difference the farther you go in the tournament because the refs tend to call fewer and fewer fouls as the tournament progresses.  VAR is changing that a little but not for the run of the mill challenge where a bigger player just muscles in for better position.  Such a shame because, for me, the Mexican team was a great story and the most fun combo of fans/hosts/team in the World Cup this year.  Oh well, Canta, no llores!

Cheers,
Pete F.

[Hieronymus]

Every World Cup that I remember, the same thing happens to Mexico.  They have good to really good teams but are smaller than other teams and often lack great finishers.  This year, they did have some players who were good finishers but the size differential was critical when England went one down and parked the bus in front of the goal.  They couldn't get around the bigger players on corner kicks and couldn't get over them in the air on entry passes.  They also seemed to have trouble beating any of the England players off the dribble.  This caused Mexico to have to play a little conservative by sending balls in and hoping they would get a man on the ball or get a good rebound.  England's goalie also played a really great game.  Without great goaltending by England, I think Mexico wins or at least gets to penalty kicks.  The size difference makes more of a difference the farther you go in the tournament because the refs tend to call fewer and fewer fouls as the tournament progresses.  VAR is changing that a little but not for the run of the mill challenge where a bigger player just muscles in for better position.  Such a shame because, for me, the Mexican team was a great story and the most fun combo of fans/hosts/team in the World Cup this year.  Oh well, Canta, no llores!

Cheers,
Pete F.

Per my earlier I think this version of Mexico traded some flair for athleticism. It left them with bad options when up a man. Try to do something really creative to get through, but this team just mostly didn’t have that working as an option. Or cross into the box and rely on improved athleticism. Unfortunately a more athletic Mexico still can’t match England and the end result was predictable - a lot of action without much in the way of real chances.

And yes this Mexico doesn’t have a Chicharito or a Borgetti to conjure something up on goal.

[Hieronymus]

Every World Cup that I remember, the same thing happens to Mexico.  They have good to really good teams but are smaller than other teams and often lack great finishers.  This year, they did have some players who were good finishers but the size differential was critical when England went one down and parked the bus in front of the goal.  They couldn't get around the bigger players on corner kicks and couldn't get over them in the air on entry passes.  They also seemed to have trouble beating any of the England players off the dribble.  This caused Mexico to have to play a little conservative by sending balls in and hoping they would get a man on the ball or get a good rebound.  England's goalie also played a really great game.  Without great goaltending by England, I think Mexico wins or at least gets to penalty kicks.  The size difference makes more of a difference the farther you go in the tournament because the refs tend to call fewer and fewer fouls as the tournament progresses.  VAR is changing that a little but not for the run of the mill challenge where a bigger player just muscles in for better position.  Such a shame because, for me, the Mexican team was a great story and the most fun combo of fans/hosts/team in the World Cup this year.  Oh well, Canta, no llores!

Cheers,
Pete F.

Per my earlier I think this version of Mexico traded some flair for athleticism. It left them with bad options when up a man. Try to do something really creative to get through, but this team just mostly didn’t have that working as an option. Or cross into the box and rely on improved athleticism. Unfortunately a more athletic Mexico still can’t match England and the end result was predictable - a lot of action without much in the way of real chances.

And yes this Mexico doesn’t have a Chicharito or a Borgetti to conjure something up on goal.

[jacket3ree]

FIFA denied Belgium's appeal of the suspended suspension, saying they don't have any standing. Belgium has let the U.S. know that should the U.S. leave Balogun, whom they (Belgium) deem ineligible, on the referee's team sheet, then all further actions remain open to them. Basically, they are playing the match under protest. If Belgium wins it all goes away. If Balogun doesn't play, it all goes away, other than another demonstration that FIFA is basically pro wrestling on a global scale. I suspect this doesn't go away, which is a shame. It's been such a good World Cup otherwise. 

Just take the red card and deal with it. I mean, who does he think he is? Ronaldo?

[jacket3ree]

FIFA denied Belgium's appeal of the suspended suspension, saying they don't have any standing. Belgium has let the U.S. know that should the U.S. leave Balogun, whom they (Belgium) deem ineligible, on the referee's team sheet, then all further actions remain open to them. Basically, they are playing the match under protest. If Belgium wins it all goes away. If Balogun doesn't play, it all goes away, other than another demonstration that FIFA is basically pro wrestling on a global scale. I suspect this doesn't go away, which is a shame. It's been such a good World Cup otherwise. 

Just take the red card and deal with it. I mean, who does he think he is? Ronaldo?

[SkiBum80]

FIFA denied Belgium's appeal of the suspended suspension, saying they don't have any standing. Belgium has let the U.S. know that should the U.S. leave Balogun, whom they (Belgium) deem ineligible, on the referee's team sheet, then all further actions remain open to them. Basically, they are playing the match under protest. If Belgium wins it all goes away. If Balogun doesn't play, it all goes away, other than another demonstration that FIFA is basically pro wrestling on a global scale. I suspect this doesn't go away, which is a shame. It's been such a good World Cup otherwise. 

Just take the red card and deal with it. I mean, who does he think he is? Ronaldo?

Yes I can understand Belgium's anger and frustration.
How about they understand the USA's?
Balogun was not carded by the ref on the play in live action. Neither yellow nor red.
Only after the ref was called to review on VAR did the red card come out.
After the ref viewed in slow motion on the VAR, which FIFA rules specifically and explicitly do not allow slow motion VAR to be used for that purpose.

[SkiBum80]

FIFA denied Belgium's appeal of the suspended suspension, saying they don't have any standing. Belgium has let the U.S. know that should the U.S. leave Balogun, whom they (Belgium) deem ineligible, on the referee's team sheet, then all further actions remain open to them. Basically, they are playing the match under protest. If Belgium wins it all goes away. If Balogun doesn't play, it all goes away, other than another demonstration that FIFA is basically pro wrestling on a global scale. I suspect this doesn't go away, which is a shame. It's been such a good World Cup otherwise. 

Just take the red card and deal with it. I mean, who does he think he is? Ronaldo?

Yes I can understand Belgium's anger and frustration.
How about they understand the USA's?
Balogun was not carded by the ref on the play in live action. Neither yellow nor red.
Only after the ref was called to review on VAR did the red card come out.
After the ref viewed in slow motion on the VAR, which FIFA rules specifically and explicitly do not allow slow motion VAR to be used for that purpose.

[BostonCard]

Wow. 10 minutes in and Belgium is eating our lunch. 1-0 and a big save from being 2-0, and a player just blowing a centering pass in front of a wide open net from it being 3-0.

BC

[BostonCard]

Wow. 10 minutes in and Belgium is eating our lunch. 1-0 and a big save from being 2-0, and a player just blowing a centering pass in front of a wide open net from it being 3-0.

BC

[dabigv13]

Ball don't lie, I suppose

[dabigv13]

Ball don't lie, I suppose

[BostonCard]

Well, just as I think the U.S. wakes up and ties it, Belgium comes right back and takes the lead within a minute.  U.S. defense has been atrocious so far.

BC

[BostonCard]

Well, just as I think the U.S. wakes up and ties it, Belgium comes right back and takes the lead within a minute.  U.S. defense has been atrocious so far.

BC

[BostonCard]

This is getting hard to watch.

BC

[BostonCard]

This is getting hard to watch.

BC

[newguy]

This is getting hard to watch.

BC

perhaps our GK should have stayed closer to his goal

[newguy]

This is getting hard to watch.

BC

perhaps our GK should have stayed closer to his goal

[BostonCard]

Ooof.  Perhaps we would have been better had Bolegun not been reinstated. Then we might have had an excuse and could have blamed the referee from the prior match for the red.  But that was about as uninspiring performance as I’ve watched from a “decent” team.

BC

[BostonCard]

Ooof.  Perhaps we would have been better had Bolegun not been reinstated. Then we might have had an excuse and could have blamed the referee from the prior match for the red.  But that was about as uninspiring performance as I’ve watched from a “decent” team.

BC

[BostonCard]

If Belgium wins it all goes away.

Well, I guess there was a silver lining to it all, but seriously, this couldn’t have been an “evenly fought, well played match where Belgium prevailed because it just finished better”

Karma really sucks.

BC

[BostonCard]

If Belgium wins it all goes away.

Well, I guess there was a silver lining to it all, but seriously, this couldn’t have been an “evenly fought, well played match where Belgium prevailed because it just finished better”

Karma really sucks.

BC